The Great Deluge

On a Sunday, probably much like this one in so many ways, a little over two years ago, our world was rocked by a massive disaster. Called the Asian Tsunami or the Boxing Day Tsunami, an unimaginably large earthquake shook the very foundations of the earth, and death emanated from its epicenter.

This earthquake was one of the largest ever recorded in modern history, it registered a 9.3 on the Richter scale having originated nearly 100 miles off the coast of northern Sumatra and about 19 miles under the ocean’s surface that produced waves that peaked at nearly 100 feet above the ocean’s surface. It has been guessed that if you could put all of the seismic activity relating to earthquakes since 1906 into a mathematic equation, nearly 13% of that total occurred on December 26th, 2005. The resulting loss of life is almost an unfathomable 229,866 men, women, and children.

On Thursday, November 12th 1970, an intense cyclone referred to afterwards as the Bhoda Cyclone, producing winds of between 111-130 mph and flooding of 9-12 feet, which is equivalent to the strength of a category 3 hurricane, descended upon what is now Bangladesh and claimed the lives of between 300,000 and 500,000 people.

In the 20th century alone, terrors emanating from atheistic communism have claimed the lives of between 65 and 95 million people. Through wars, genocide, purges, political maneuvering, and random and wanton murder, small segments of powerful men have condemned millions of others to death.

The horrific scope and reality of tragedies and atrocities, whether of man’s own creation or as the result of divine or “natural” causes, are often communicated in a variety of ways. For instance, these types of events are often recounted in numbers of jobs lost, dollars lost, homes or property destroyed, homes evacuated, people infected, square miles covered, miles per hour (wind), depth of flood waters, and lives lost.

That being the case, the single greatest calamity ever to fall upon the earth and to afflict mankind cannot be measured in the numbers of homes lost, lives lost, property destroyed, or in terms of economic impact. No, the greatest of all calamities – the worst of the worst – was so massive, so far reaching, and so devastating that it can only be communicated, numerically speaking, by the number of survivors. And there were only eight of them.

This climaxing event, and the events that lead up to it and flowed from it, is recorded for us in Genesis 6-9. And it is on this 17th of February, 2007, that I want to first look back the events of the Great Deluge and then look forward to the greatest single tragedy. Why look at this today instead of picking up where we left of last year with the 2nd chapter of Paul’s letter to the Philippians?

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. (Genesis 7:11)

Now I am fully aware that the Jewish calendar of Moses’ time and before is not equivalent to our current 365 ¼ day calendar year. And so, it was not on February 17th in the year 1656 after creation. But for tonight, just think of it as Sunday February 17th 2008, or February 17th of some other year. My only point with emphasizing the date is this: who in Noah’s time (including himself) would have guessed that the world would end on a normal day in the middle of February? And likewise we must all be mindful that we do not choose the day, hour, or manner in which we will die or in which those around us will die – it will most likely occur on an otherwise normal day.

Why, why was the world destroyed in this way at this time in the single greatest natural disaster in history?

⁵ Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. ⁶ The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. ⁷ The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them." (Genesis 6:5-7)

The answer: sin. Generally speaking, it was the overall and continual wickedness of man on the earth. But the “straw that broke the camel’s back” as it were, was the great perversion of the coming of the sons of God into the daughters of men. This was, specifically an unholy mingling in marriage. And as flashy or notably horrid as this sinful act was, the reality is that it was not simply this one single sin that caused God’s anger to burn towards the people.

The simplicity of this answer – namely, that the world was destroyed because God was angry about the sin of the people – should not cause a thoughtfully dismissive “hmmm” or “duh” or any other reaction that would cause us to gloss over this vitally important and pertinent truth. It should cause us to sit in awe of God’s perfect and holy standard of perfection.

Even using words like “perfection”, “holiness”, or “righteousness” are so lacking in their ability to communicate, at least to me, what God’s standard truly is. I understand the idea…to a point, but the weight of the truth of God’s demands and expectations especially in light of my inability to meet these expectations, is so fleeting and impossible to wrap my mind around.

So, how did God deal with the lawbreakers in Noah’s day? As terrible as the Boxing Day Tsunami was, as bad as the Bhoda Cyclone was, or as devastating as 100 years of Communism has been, the great deluge in Noah’s day minimizes them all.

The Bible records in Genesis chapter 7 that the “all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened” (11) and that the rain continued for 40 days. The flood was so dramatic that it covered the highest peaks of the mountains by as much as 25 or 30 feet. Mt Everest’s is 29,028 feet above sea level. That means that the waters reached nearly 29,050 feet above sea level. That is, of course, unless there were greater and loftier peaks that were swept away during the great deluge or have since been worn down. So, at least, the waters were around 29,050 feet in depth.

This means that, if the water surge was consistent throughout the entire 40 days, the waters increased in depth by ½ foot every minute, 30 feet ever hour, 726 feet each day, until it reached its final depth of over 5.5 miles. The rains stopped after 40 days, but the flood waters remained for a total of 150 days. And it was not until July 17th, at the end of the 150 days, that the ark rested on Ararat. But it was not until February 27th of the following year that God finally commanded Noah to leave the ark.

This is a massively clear picture of just how much God hates sin.

But the flood is not just a story about God’s hatred of sin, no. It is a picture of that, yes, but it is also a beautiful picture of God’s grace. God saved Noah and his family.

⁵ Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. ⁶ The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. ⁷ The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them. ⁸ But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD." (Genesis 6:5-8; emphasis mine)

The Hebrew word translated as “favor” means graciousness, a subjective (kindness, favor) or objective (beauty); and in the Greek Septuagint, this word is translated “xariV$” which is the same Greek New Testament word that is used for God’s unmerited favor that is bestowed upon us in Christ Jesus because of His good pleasure.

This was an exercise of divine mercy in the midst of judgment, for the transmission of the human family. This preservation may be regarded as a reward of his piety. But it was a 'reward of grace,' as one that trusted in a better righteousness; and it is no small proof of its being a reward of grace, that it extended to his whole family, though one of them was wicked.¹

“This is a Hebrew expression that means God was propitious to Noah and favored him. The Hebrews often spoke in this way. They would say, “If I have found grace in your sight: instead of saying, “If I am acceptable to you” or “If you will grant me a favor.” This phrase needs to be noted, because certain ignorant people infer with futile subtlety that if men find race in God’s sight, it is because they seek it through their own industry and merit. I acknowledge, indeed, that here Noah is declared to have been acceptable to God because by living uprightly he kept himself pure from the pollution of the world. But from where did he attain this integrity except from the preventing grace of God? The origin, therefore, of this favor was gratuitous mercy. Afterward the Lord, having once embraced him, retained him under his own hand, so that he would not perish with the rest of the world.²

God graced Noah for the same reason, even though the manifestation itself was different, that He acts graciously towards all of those who have been saved and will be saved.

That being said, Noah was not an average American evangelical in the way that he carried himself and acted. The prophet Ezekiel puts Noah, along with Job and Daniel, as the symbol of piety and obedience that – even if they were present in Jerusalem during the time of God’s judgment against it, could not spare even their families for their own sake, but only themselves (cf. Ez 14:14ff). The writer of the Hebrews puts forth Noah as an example of his faith in and reverent obedience to God (cf. Heb 11:7). And Peter referred to Noah as a “preacher of righteousness” (cf. 2 Peter 2:5).

Even with this impressive resume that few mortal men can equal, God was gracious to Noah and his family because God was gracious to Noah and his family.

Following Noah’s Deliverance from the Great Deluge, God made an unsolicited and an unconditional covenant with Noah, and through him, He made it with you and me, that God would never again destroy the earth in the waters of a great and terrible flood. And in order to remind us of this promise, He gave to us the beautiful rainbow.

What a glorious picture of God’s gracious salvation! This picture and view of salvation was not lost to the Church, but before I can get into that, I want to go back to look at the reason that brings us to the brink and puts us in the cross-hairs of God’s perfectly aimed rifle.

The cause of our problem before God is no different than the root cause that brought about the Great Deluge in Noah’s day. And God’s wrath has been kindled against many individuals and nations in the past – sometimes He stays His hand for a while, and other times He does not hold back.

God destroyed Sodom, Gomorrah, and their surrounding cities. God was going to kill Moses just after He’d commissioned him to lead Israel out of captivity and slavery, but Moses was spared when his wife circumcised their son on the spot. God was seemingly on the verge of destroying the nation many times just following their miraculous Exodus from Egypt. God declared destruction of the nation of Israel if they disobeyed, and He carried it out through Assyria and Babylon. And God has prepared a place of the most extreme torment and misery for all people everywhere who die in a state of sin – even if the only infraction was that you disobeyed your parents one time when you were a teenager.

Sin is horrible. Sin is repulsive. Sin is repugnant. The glamorous nature of the sins of Sodom & Gomorrah, the people of Noah’s day, or even the blatant idolatry of the Nation of Israel shouldn’t desensitize us to the horrific nature of the smallest transgression of His divine standard. Hatred is murder. Lust is adultery. Doubt of God’s promises is slander against His good name! Pornography is a vile and disgusting perversion of sexuality, a betrayal of your spouse – whether you’re married now or you will become married in the future – no matter if you’re in your clean and isolated home sitting at your computer or at Naked Sushi night at a Twin Cities restaurant that is being advertised on radio that is targeted to people who would hold to many of our same social ideals and political values.

And again, let me restate that we must not casually hear and agree with the general idea that human sin is evil in the sight of God. I would argue that the more we seek to understand sin, not in a desire to revel in sin as the world does, but in order to understand just how great our debt is to Christ, and it is this understanding when coupled with a greater understanding of the beauty, majesty, glory, and mercy of God displayed through His grace in our salvation that we grow in our walk with Him by leaps and bounds.

“We are all loathsome to God, before we are washed pure in the blood of Christ!

By nature, we are all in a filthy and cursed condition. We are a lump of clay and sin mingled together. Sin not only blinds us—but defiles us. It is called filthiness (James 1:21). And to show how befilthying a thing it is, it is compared . . .
to a plague of the heart (1 Kings 8:38),
to corruption (Deuteronomy 32:5),
to vomit (2 Peter 2:22),
to a menstrual cloth (Isaiah 30:22).

If all the evils in the world were put together and their quintessence strained out—they could not make a thing so black and polluted as sin is! A sinner is a devil in a man's shape! When Moses' rod was turned into a serpent—he fled from it. If God would open men's eyes and show them their deformities and damnable spots—they would fly from themselves, as from serpents!

When grace comes—it washes off this hellish filth! It turns ravens into swans. It makes those who are as black as hell—to become as white as snow!

"Christ gave Himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for Himself a people that are His very own." Christ shed His blood—to wash off our filth. The cross was both an altar and a laver.

Jesus died not only to save us from wrath (1 Thes. 1:10)—but to save us from sin! (Matthew 1:21). Out of his side came water which signifies our cleansing—as well as blood which signifies our justifying (1 John 5:6).”³

The final destination for those who are found in contempt of God’s Holy Court is the same for us as it was for Noah’s friends and neighbors. This is a place of eternal and unmatched suffering and horror.

“Hell is described as a place where "their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched." Repeatedly Jesus spoke of outer darkness and a furnace of fire, where there will be wailing, weeping, and gnashing of teeth.

The Book of Revelation describes hell as "a lake of fire burning with brimstone" (Rev 19:20; 20:10,14-15; 21:8). Into hell will be thrown the beast and the false prophet (Rev 19:20). At the end of the age the devil himself will be thrown into it, along with death and hades and all whose names are not in the Book of Life. "And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever" (Rev 20:10 b).

Because of the symbolic nature of the language, some people question whether hell consists of actual fire. Such reasoning should bring no comfort to the lost. The reality is greater than the symbol. The Bible exhausts human language in describing heaven and hell. The former is more glorious, and the latter more terrible, than language can express.”⁴

Now whereas there has not been a singular event that God has caused virtually the entirety of mankind to meet with their eternal fate since the Great Deluge, there has been a single event that has occurred that has more perfectly and more manifoldly displayed God’s hatred of Sin and need for justice to be served. It is the greatest tragedy that has ever occurred – not because of the outcome, but because of the actual event itself. The only way for God’s wrath at you, and me, and every other redeemed individual to be satisfied was with the death of His own Son.

He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Cor 5:21)

And it is here – in the sacrifice of the Beloved Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, that Peter draws our minds back to the catastrophe of the flood.

¹⁸ For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; ¹⁹ in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, ²⁰ who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. ²¹ Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you-- not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, ²² who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him. (1 Peter 3:18-22; emphasis mine)

Two questions come up from this text. The first is this: Does baptism – and by that I mean water baptism – save us? To that question I would answer with an un-hesitating “NO!” The second question is this: If water baptism is not what saves us, what in the world is Peter saying here? And I want to answer that in two ways.

First, what Does the Bible clearly say about how man is saved?

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. (John 3:18)

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. (John 5:24)

I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. (John 6:47)

For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. (Romans 3:28)

nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. (Galatians 2:16)

⁸ For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; ⁹ not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:8,9)

¹⁶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. ¹⁷ For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.” (Romans 1:16,17)

He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36)

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, (Titus 3:5)

Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, (Romans 5:1)

I have only given a few verses that argue for the fact of salvation being through faith by the means of God’s grace. But the fact that there are so many more verses than what I have provided is an argument for the overwhelming nature of the Bible’s clear statement about the doctrine of justification by faith.

Justification by Faith. Although the Lord Jesus has paid the price for our justification, it is through our faith that He is received and His righteousness is experienced and enjoyed (Rom 3:25-30). Faith is considered righteousness (Rom 4:3,9), not as the work of man (Rom 4:5), but as the gift and work of God (John 6:28-29; Phil 1:29).⁵

Second Question: If we’re saved by grace through faith and not by means of water baptism, what on earth is Peter saying here? What is the analogy that he is drawing?

The first key is to understand what ideas are “corresponding” in what Peter is trying to say. Peter is relating Christ’s sacrifice and our salvation through it to the entire story of Noah and the ark. He is not comparing the act of water baptism and a salvation effecting quality that it might have with Noah’s experience. Noah was saved by the ark, not by the water.

The water of the Great Deluge baptized the world in death, but Noah sailed safely through it in the Ark that the Lord provided. Similarly, when we are saved by Christ we are placed inside of the perfect ark that has been baptized in the wrath of God’s judgment on the cross.

“But baptism (from baptize) simply means ‘to immerse,’ and not just in water. Peter here uses baptism to refer to a figurative immersion into Christ as the ark of safety that will sail over the holocaust of judgment on the wicked.

God preserved [Noah and his family] in the midst of His judgment, which is what He also does for all those who trust in Christ.”⁶

Therefore, by being found in Christ Jesus, through faith, God displays His desire to give mercy and grace while still showing His requirement for justice.

God offers two promises, one desirable and one undesirable. The first promise is that if you, as a sinner, die in your sins, God promises to cast you into a reality that is far clearer, far more tangible than anything you know here on earth. And that reality will completely and utterly crush you, but you will be preserved to endure it in misery. That is the first promise, the promise of God’s vengeance and His righteous and holy wrath that will be poured out on all ungodliness.

The second promise is God’s promise of grace. Oh, if you will but call on the Lord, confess and turn from your sins, place your complete trust in Him alone to deliver you from His wrath by means of His substituting His Son in your place – if you trust in the finished and perfect work of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary, God promises to give you eternal life. He will give you a new heart, with new desires, and you will wage war on those sins that so justly condemned you before the throne of Glory. He will cause you to grow in holiness and cause you to desire His word and love His Son.

It is possible that we can experience some conviction and yet be unchanged. After hearing a much more powerful sermon and articulation of the gospel than I have presented tonight, King Herod Agrippa said, “In a short time you will persuade me to become a Christian.” (Acts 26:28) He had some conviction there – but I don’t know of a good historical account that tells of the conversion of King Agrippa II.

Don’t let the conviction of the Holy Spirit wane as you move it to the back of your mind and ignore it. For there will come a time that, after having done that so often and so long, that you will no longer be convicted and you will be adrift in your unbelief.

---

¹ (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

² Genesis, John Calvin. p. 71.(The Crossway Classic Commentaries)

³ The Beatitudes, Thomas Watson, 1660

⁴
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright (c)1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

⁵ (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright (c)1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

⁶ 1 Peter, John MacArthur, p. 217

O Lord, Pardon My Iniquity

“For Your name's sake, O LORD, Pardon my iniquity, for it is great.” (Psalms 25:11)

I’ve been thinking about and meditating, if you will, about this verse for the past few days. I have wanted to write something about it, but haven’t had the time or taken the opportunity to do so until now. But the longer I gazed at this verse, the more and more I became amazed at how much truth is jam packed into it. I have taken to praying this in my mind throughout the day, and it is a great shot in the arm to realign my heart whenever it might go astray.

The phrase, “pardon my iniquity,” is such a stripping request because it is my confession and agreement with God that I have offended Him. Furthermore, I have no ability in and of myself to rectify this situation with my Lord. The awareness of the size of my debt is only increased the longer I dwell on the Lord because my sin and iniquity “is very great.” I understand that it takes a miracle for God to be merciful to me, and it is the mercy of a pardon that I truly entreat and so desperately do not deserve.

And if I ever found myself full of pride because I had found a Lord who would pardon my sin and wash my soul in the cleansing flood of His blood, I can hearken back to the truth that He saved me, He has forgiven me, and He will keep me for His name’s sake. For Your name’s sake, O Lord, restore my soul. For Your name’s sake, O Lord, lead me and guide me. For Your name’s sake, O Lord, act toward me in grace and not in due measure for my own works. For Your name’s sake, O Lord....

But God Remembered Noah

The story of Noah always makes me sit back and read it as a little child. I mean, there is so much in this story that the scale alone makes me want to catch my breath. Perhaps it is just me, but when we see the whole earth as wretched and vile and that it deserved to be wiped out completely, it makes me sit back and marvel at God’s favoring Noah. If Noah’s heart, just like all men everywhere for all time, was only continually evil from his youth (cf. Genesis 6:4; 8:5), then when Noah found favor in God’s eyes, it must have been because of God’s desire to have mercy on Noah.

But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD. (Genesis 6:8)

God would have been justified in wiping out Noah and the rest of his family that were saved when He destroyed the rest of humanity. I think that it would be extremely detrimental to gloss over this fact or not to address it when reading and meditating on the story of Noah and the flood. And that Noah found favor in God’s eyes must have been attributed only to God’s mercy and grace. Furthermore, for anyone to find favor before God happens despite anything and everything that the person says, does, or thinks.

But God remembered Noah (Genesis 8:1a)

The fact that God remembers His own is an astoundingly glorious truth. Even amidst the destruction of literally everything else on the planet, Noah could have (and should have) had the uttermost peace and felt completely than safe and secure in the ark. One of the truly great things about God’s favor in salvation that we learn see clearly from the New Testament is that once God has saved you, once you have found favor with God based on His grace and mercy alone, we have no need to fear even though the world comes crashing down around us. As a practical note, this doesn’t mean that Christians won’t endure hardship, persecution, torture, or violent and horrible deaths, but it does mean that this is the extent at which we can be tormented or suffer (cf. Matthew 10:28). But Noah had the expressed promise of temporal delivery from this maelstrom (cf. Genesis 6:18ff), and so he could confidently wait for God to deliver him even though he was on the ark for over one year.

Regardless of the time between the promise and the deliverance, God is faithful. If anyone has trusted in Christ alone for salvation, whether they did that at 5, 55, or 105 years of age, God will remember the saving work that He has done when death comes and we have nothing to fear.

But know that the LORD has set apart the godly man for Himself; The LORD hears when I call to Him. (Psalms 4:3)

Praise God that He sets apart those in whom He favors, and He then hears us when we call to Him.

“Whosoever will” and God’s Sovereignty in Election

Since the last Friday of 2007 I have been thinking about the subjects of sovereignty, depravity, grace, free will, election, and the atonement in order to formulate an answer a question that was posed to me regarding a sermon I preached on December 9, 2007 titled "For To You It Has Been Granted" based on Philippians 1:29. The following is both the thoughts of my heart and an intentional articulation of how I understand the gospel.

My intention with this article is not primarily to win an argument or to “convert” anyone to the theological convictions that I hold. I say that while also believing that my position is true (otherwise, why would I hold it), the theology that I am defending has been the victor in the debate in my mind (otherwise, why would I hold to it), and that I would not be at all upset if anyone who currently disagrees with me were to come to be in agreement with me over time. That being said, I truly want to be subordinate to Scripture, and so I will not neglect to look at these issues or passages that may be difficult to understand because they may seem to push me away from my understanding of sovereignty.

To start off this article, I would like to articulate a few of the many points of agreement that I share with my more Arminian brethren. Many of those who may have some points of contention with the force of my convictions and their doctrinal implications are good friends of mine, and those who are very passionate about the preaching of the gospel to the lost. Some are family, some are Baptists, some are both of these, and some are friends who also love me and my family. That being the case, I am sure that we agree, believe, confess, and would defend the following things:

• Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and not based on man’s merit or works (Ephesians 2:8,9).
• Man must be born again to inherit eternal life (John 3).
• The correct response by any man to the hearing of the gospel must be faith in Christ and repentance of sin (Mark 1:15).
• The gospel is and should be preached to anyone and everyone and anyone who will believe will be saved. (Rom 10:10-17).

I am sure that there are more issues and things pertinent the focus of this article that we would agree on and stand shoulder to shoulder on, but these were just a few to begin with. However, what tends to be a primary point of disagreement seems to be dealing with the compatibility or incompatibility of human responsibility, or free, will and that of God’s sovereignty in all things including election and salvation. I submit that in each of our understandings of these two things they are compatible in our own minds. The difference is that our understandings of sovereignty and free will are different. So, perhaps the best way to begin is to briefly articulate how I define these words and make a distinction from how many of my Christian brethren may define them.

1. Free Will (not my definition):
• Definition: Man’s will is free to choose to believe in God. Even though man is dead in sin, there is a real sense that he is able (in and of himself and his own power apart from a specific working of God) to place his faith in Christ that goes against his sinful nature.
• Application: Natural man will freely choose to sin, but he can also freely choose to believe in Christ and repent of sin.
2. Free Will (my definition):
• Definition: Man’s will is able to choose anything that is able to choose. He can choose anything that his desire and nature will allow him. He, in and of himself, is not able to make choices that supersede or counteract his nature and desire.
• Application: Natural man will freely, consistently, and constantly choose to sin, reject God, and never ever repent of sin, trust in, believe in, or worship Christ because that is not what the sinful nature desires.

Whether or not the second definition that I gave accurately reflects any specific person’s personal definition or not, I believe that it may be a good way to state how many people think of free will. So, realizing this, in an effort both to defend my position while at the same time showing how and why I believe that the other position (which is drawn from the first definition above) is not correct, I will divide the body of my thoughts into three sections. The first section will be addressing the theological and Scriptural support for my position. The second section will address the theological and Scriptural objections commonly raised against the position that I hold. The third section will address practical concerns that may arise.

Let it be noted that neither my statements in affirmation of the sovereign understanding of salvation that I will put forth nor the objections to that understanding that I will address are to be understood as being a full treatment of the issue at hand. I am sure that this is obvious, but if there are concerns or proofs that are not addressed, either adequately or at all, in this article, it is not out of an intentional shirking of verses or arguments. So, please feel free to raise verses in objection, affirmation, or question regarding this debate so that we can be as iron sharpening iron.

Section One: Scripture Support

To start off this section, let me say that I completely and whole-heartedly believe that anyone who calls on the Lord can and will be saved. It is impossible for someone who calls on the name of the Lord in true repentance and faith not to be saved. So, I am not trying to duck any passages that say this. I believe it! Let me say again, “for ‘WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.’” (Romans 10:13)

The issue, in my mind, is not can “whosoever will” call on the name of the Lord and be saved. The question is “who will” and “how will” they believe. Or, how can the “whosoever will” call on the name of the Lord and be saved. And to begin to answer this question, I will say that God makes a sweeping declaration of the extent of the vileness of the human condition both before the great flood and directly after. In both of these places, God sums up man’s condition by stating that “every intent of the thoughts of [man’s] heart was only evil continually” (Gen 6:5) and that “the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 8:21). I don’t believe that one can read what God has said here and come up with any notion of some ability to do the very opposite of evil which is trusting in and believing in God. The New Testament is not silent on this predicament either. When writing to the Galatians about the differences between the fruits of the Spirit and the deeds of the flesh, Paul begins by setting up a dichotomy,

“For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.” (Galatians 5:17)

Even in the heart and lives of those who are saved (as the context is referring to here), there is nothing similar about the desires and inclinations of the flesh as compared to the Spirit of God that is present in the believer. And let it be noted that it is only after God has saved a person that there is even this type of a struggle.

“¹ And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, ² in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.” (Ephesians 2:1,2)

¹⁰ as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; ¹¹ THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; (Romans 3:10,11)

Before the gift of faith and the new birth, the flesh still is opposed to the Spirit, but there is no Spirit to move the person away from evil and toward God. In other words, unless there is a distinct and sweeping work of God on any person’s behalf, there would not be anyone who would call on the name of the Lord.

So, my contention is that all men are dead until they are made alive, born again (John 3), by the Spirit. And until that time, all men would freely and continually choose to blaspheme God and reject Him utterly. No one would (or could) believe in Christ. And the primary disagreement, if I were to guess, that we have is not even with what I have laid out so far, but it is with the implications that I drew (based on my understanding of Scripture) about the “whosoever” people.

On Sunday the 9th, my only goal with the portion of the passage that I was preaching out of (Phil 1:29) was to make the point that faith, initial saving faith (but also continuing faith), is a gift from God and it does not originate with man. I did this based on three points, the first is that faith had to be a gift from God because the Bible says so (Eph 2:8, Phil 1:29). But I built the case, drawing on the above Scriptures from Genesis, Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians to say that man is also incapable and unwilling to believe in Christ on our own.

My point on Sunday was not to preach on Predestination or election because that is not what the verse was talking about, and I tried to be very careful not to preach about those issues. However, the only way to completely address the “whosoever will” concern is to bring up the idea of election.

And to do that, I will just reference a few passages that are clear (I believe) statements to the affirmative and make some brief comments about them, and then once I’ve done that I will try to deal with one or two that are used as objections against it.

But once again, I want to be clear that this was not material or subject matter that I preached at all on Sunday evening.

¹ Now the LORD said to Abram, "Go forth from your country, And from your relatives And from your father's house, To the land which I will show you; ² And I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you, And make your name great; And so you shall be a blessing; ³ And I will bless those who bless you, And the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3)

God called Abraham, who was a wretched sinner in opposition to God if he was not a practicing idol worshipper like those around him as well. God chose Him instead of Lot, Terah, or anyone else including Noah or Shem (both Noah and Shem were still alive at that time) to father the chosen people.

³ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, ⁴ just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love ⁵ He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, ⁶ to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. ⁷ In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace ⁸ which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight ⁹ He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him ¹⁰ with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him ¹¹ also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, ¹² to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. ¹³ In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, ¹⁴ who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:3-14)

God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world according to the kind intention of His will, not according to the future choices of humans. We have been predestined according to His purpose based on the counsel of His will, not according to our purpose, will, choices, or seen future faith.

³⁵ Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. ³⁶ "But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. ³⁷ "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. ³⁸ "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. ³⁹ "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. ⁴⁰ "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day." ⁴¹ Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, "I am the bread that came down out of heaven." ⁴² They were saying, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, `I have come down out of heaven'?" ⁴³ Jesus answered and said to them, "Do not grumble among yourselves. ⁴⁴ "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:35-44)

Whoever believes will be saved (v.41), but Christ makes a clear statement about who will believe and come to Him. The Father will give to Christ all of those people who will come to Christ, and Christ will keep all of them (v.37). But He also goes on to say that no one can come to Him unless God draws him (v.44). The meaning is that all of those whom God draws to Christ are saved by Christ. Those who are not drawn are not saved. Not everyone is drawn because not everyone is saved.

¹⁰ And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; ¹¹ for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, ¹² it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER." ¹³ Just as it is written, "JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."

¹⁴ What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! ¹⁵ For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION." ¹⁶ So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. ¹⁷ For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH." ¹⁸ So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. ¹⁹ You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" ²⁰ On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? ²¹ Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? ²² What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? ²³ And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, ²⁴ even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. (Romans 9:10-24)

This section in Romans 9 is extensive and I cannot address everything here, but first of all if election was not based on sovereign grace alone but on the foreseen faith of individuals based upon their free will decision to believe in God, would this objection that Paul addresses here even be raised? How could God ever seem unjust if you, the individual, bore the full weight of your own non-election because you weren’t smart enough, wise enough, or “whatever” enough to receive salvation based on your own person and attributes? The objection of injustice only comes when our minds have a hard time dealing with the truth that God freely elects and chooses whom He desires to be saved according to the council of His will (cf. Eph 1).

Paul clarifies that he is stating what he is stating in this section “so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls”. It is not based upon any future seen faith, but on the sovereign Lord who is doing the calling. Furthermore, God claims the authority and the right to have compassion on whomever He wants. Some vessels were created for honorable use and some for common use, and that is done so by the choice of the potter. And God shows His patience by enduring the vessels of wrath that were prepared for destruction when He has no obligation to do so.

”⁴ But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, ⁵ He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,” (Titus 3:4,5)

Now while this verse is specifically in response to the works righteous heresy of the Judaizers, I think that the application is true for any “deed done in righteousness” and that would, in my opinion, include saving faith. Again, if we understand that saving faith is to have originated from the person himself and not in response to a specific work done on his or her life by God that is not done to those who do not believe, then we, in effect, make man his own savior. I don’t say that lightly or flippantly, but purposefully and intentionally. If my decision, apart from any specific work on God’s part, is the thing that activates my salvation, then I truly am the one who adds my mite, however small that mite might be, to the scales of God’s justice that tips it all to the side of salvation and not damnation.

Also, I fully understand that Christians, true Christians, who would hold a different view of depravity and election than what I hold would never say that they believe that they are their own saviors. That is precisely why I stated that I believe we are in agreement about salvation being by grace through faith and not on account of works at the beginning of this response. So my statement was to point out what seems to be the logical conclusion of the understanding of free will that I am opposed to. So I am not attacking the genuineness of the salvation of believers who disagree with me, but I am trying to point out that their theology in this regard, however genuine, is not consistent.

² "But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep. ³ "To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. ⁴ "When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.

²⁶ "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. ²⁷ "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; ²⁸ and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. ²⁹ "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. ³⁰ "I and the Father are one." (John 10:2-4, 26-30)

I think that John 10:26 is pivotal here. Those who Jesus is talking to don’t believe because they are not His sheep; He didn’t say that they are not His sheep because they do not believe. The point is important because it goes to the root of the problem. The sheep believe because they are His, they are not His because their faith in Him ultimately makes that so. Their belief doesn’t make them (in an eternal sense) His sheep. Their being His sheep and having been chosen from before the foundation of the world is the reason why they believe.

“When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48)

Corresponding to John 10, those who were appointed to eternal life believed the preaching; it is not the believing of the preaching that caused them to be appointed to eternal life.

Section Two: Scriptural Objections Addressed:

One of the most common objections to the view of sovereign grace and election that I have put forth has to do with an understanding of the “whosoever” passages in the Scriptures. In order to address this issue, I did a search for whosoever passages and found 179 in the KJV (that word is not used in the NAS, NKJV, ESV that I normally use)¹, and most of these don’t deal with the doctrine of salvation. So instead of trying to wade through them and address ones that are do not strong arguments for the position that is opposite mine, I will deal with seems to be the primary “whosoever” passages that many people have raised. These “whosoever” passages that will be addressed are Romans 10:13 and John 3:16, but I will also address a few others that are commonly brought up.

¹ First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, ² for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. ³ This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:1-4)

I think that it is accurate here, and not a stretch, to understand that the “all men” here is referring to all types of men including kings “who are in authority.” One of the things that is key to remember, I think, is that the Jewish culture was a very racist one, and gentiles were possibly considered to be a little better than dogs. And to think that Jehovah would save Jews was totally reasonable, but Jesus and all of the writers of the New Testament are continually stating that there are sheep of a different flock (i.e. from the gentile nations), and so Jews needed to understand this (cf. John 10). The whole issue of circumcision and law keeping was rooted, at least in part, in the false idea that Christianity and Christians had to be Jewish. So, the gospel call and salvation is for all types of people, not just Jews.

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

This one honestly had given me much concern, but I think that I understand it better now. The hardest thing about this passage is trying to understand that the letter was written to the elect of God or to those who have “received a faith of the same kind as ours” (cf. 2 Peter 1:1), and the specific intended and primary meaning of these words were for those who were saved and in the churches at that time. So the “you” are the saved. The Lord is not wishing that any of His own perish, but that all of His own would come to repentance.

for “WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.” (Romans 10:13)

This verse is absolutely true and correct. The problem is that this verse does not describe the person who calls or how they call on the Lord. It simply says that “whoever will call on the name of the Lord” will be the beneficiary of salvation in Christ. This addresses the question of “what will happen” to those who call on Christ, but it does not address “how” question. How can a dead man call on anyone? How can a dead man desire anything? It is the “how” question that is the heart of the issue, not the “who” or “whosoever”. The answer is, I believe, apart from God’s specific work in an individual’s heart (the new birth, the granting of faith, the grating of repentance), there would be no “whosoever”.

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

This is the primary “whosoever” passage that I could come up with, and I want to address it delicately. First of all, I have to come to this verse understanding that natural man, under no circumstances because of his depravity, would or could choose to believe in the glorious Son of God. “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18). Secondly, there is a very true sense that God loves the world, the whole world, the sinful and the redeemed, “for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.” (Matthew 5:45b) So, there is a general grace and a general love and patience that God displays to all humanity. I mean, the vilest rejecter of God will sin and live to breathe again. That is truly a display of God’s general grace toward mankind. John also tells us that if we love the world that the love of the Father is not in us (cf. 1 John 2:15). I don’t think that we should be too extravagant in our understanding of God’s love for the whole world.

Q: Does God love the world?
A: Yes.

Q: If anyone believes in the Son and repents of their sin, will they be saved?
A: Yes.

Q: Do those who do not believe in Christ also reject Him and sin against God willfully (i.e. in line with their will)?
A: Yes. (cf. Gen 6:7; 8:21)

Q: Do those who receive salvation by repentance and faith do so willfully?
A: Yes. Their wills have been transformed by the new birth and they have been given faith and repentance.

This is how I have come to understand God’s sovereign work in salvation. I believe that it is consistent to the whole counsel of God, it magnifies God above all things, and it still holds man accountable for his actions toward God. In short, both the continual sinful rejection of God by unregenerate man as well as faith in Him by regenerate man are free, willful, and deliberate acts done in accordance with the thoughts, intents, and desires of that individual person. In no way does God’s work in election drag a sinner “kicking and screaming” into heaven so that “heaven would be like hell”²

Section Three: The Practical Objections:

The first objection tends to be a concern that taking a firm stance on the doctrine of election completely disregards 'whosoever will'. I did attempt to deal with this in the previous portion of my response. But, for the record, I do not see any contradiction or compromise in understanding what the Bible puts forth as the doctrine of election and the doctrinal understanding of man’s corrupt nature.

Another objection usually deals with the concern that pride, arrogance, or a lack of evangelistic motivation is the inevitable result of taking a firm and defined position on the doctrine of election and God’s sovereignty. Basically, the call to witness is not ever limited to “go find the elect and preach to them only”. We are to go the world and preach the gospel to everyone. I still contend that understanding the doctrines of election, grace, and depravity are the most self-stripping truths that break down every pillar of pride or self-importance and cultivate the exact opposite reaction; that of humility and being poor in Spirit.

Some simply dislike a “hard line” stance taken on these doctrines. But to be quite frank, I am not sure what is totally meant when they refer to this position as being “hard line”. If they are simply referring to a clear, definite, and forcefully preached understanding of God’s sovereignty in election that is fairly summarized by the 5 points of Calvinism³, then that is fine. If that is the case however, I do not know if it is any more “hard line” of a position than a “hard line” position of non-distinction or assertion that the answer is so complete a mystery that the understanding of the doctrine of election as I have put forth is not possible. And if that is the case, we have a choice of which hard line to be on. However, if by “hard line” people are referring to hyper-Calvinism, which may see no need of evangelism or other types of perversions, let me make it clear that I am not a hyper-Calvinist.

Christians are to preach the word so that the elect can hear it and believe. But, more than that, evangelism is the method that God has setup for the furthering of His will, His kingdom, and done for His glory. We do it out of obedience to Christ and love for Him. I should witness with the primary motivation of glorifying God, not of saving sinners. Do we want sinners saved? Yes. But if we put our primary goal or intention on anything other than God and His glory (since I believe that is the primary thing that He is concerned with), this goal or intention that is idolatrous at the heart. No matter what replaces God and His glory as our focus, whatever “it” is, “it” is being exalted above God and that is unacceptable.

I truly believe that God will save all of His own, but that does not ever give me the cause to think that I should sit back, eat potato chips, and shut my mouth about the gospel. That kind of an attitude (that some hyper-Calvinists espouse) is as false an understanding of the Scriptural call to evangelize as universalism is. This perversion of the command to evangelize is easily defeated by simply looking at the Scriptures. I am commanded by Scripture to go and preach the gospel, and that is something that I both take seriously and fail miserably at.

Is it possible that this understanding of “chosen” can or does bring up the sinful reactions of pride, laziness, or others among believers at times? Yes, that is possible. But the possibility or reality of sinning because of a certain theological stance no more condemns my theological stance than another. Likewise, a more strongly held “whosoever will” focus in theology with the emphasis placed on man’s decision over and above God’s sovereign plan may produce the sinful reaction of pride or produce a mindset that says “I was smart enough to believe, but those people were too dumb…”. The issue is this: which theology is true? It is not which adherents sin less, evangelize more, or anything else.

I hope that my treatment of these issues have come across in a way that both has been fair to objections that can be raised and that has addressed some of the pertinent texts. I hope and pray that this will encourage anyone to engage the texts with me, and if we still disagree, we can reason together over specific passages of Scripture. This article has been a labor of love for me. Love for my friends and their families. Love for my church and fellowship. Love for the Scriptures. Love for the gospel. Love for the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

---

¹ http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?section=0&showtools=0&version=kjv&word=whosoever&st=1&sd=0&new=1

² Hank Hanegraaff, the Bible answer man, is a staunch advocate of libertarian free will that characterizes election with this type of language. I have heard it on the air many times.

³ As a note, the 5 points of Calvinism only became “points” in response to the theological false teachings put forth by Joseph Arminius’s followers.

Arminian’s Theological Assertions (5 Points of Arminianism)	Dutch Church’s Response (5 Points of Calvinism)
Free-will/Human Ability	Total Depravity/Complete Inability
Conditional Election (God ratifies human faith)	Unconditional Election
Universal Redemption/General Atonement	Limited Atonement/Particular Redemption
Resistable Grace	Irresistible Grace
Falling from Grace (can lose your salvation)	Perseverance of the Saints

The Grace of God: From Salvation to Suffering

Usually when the term “grace” is thrown around in Christian circles, we are primarily referring to the way in which God saves sinful men from death and hell and saves them unto Himself. I believe that this is one of the single greatest and most foundational things that must be understood about the Bible and Christ’s ministry. Furthermore, I believe that there are four different classes of grace (that I can think of now) that are God bestows on people for various reasons with various outcomes. This first one is saving grace that God only bestows on those people, the elect, who believe in Christ and the gospel for salvation.

The second means of grace is the general grace of God. Simply, this refers to the fact that God is patient as He endures the ongoing rebellion of humanity allowing billions of people life and breath that they only use to sin against Him. God is not obligated to give anyone any time on this earth at all. I think that Jonathon Edwards put it best when he said that it is by noting but the “mere pleasure of God” that allows wicked men, any man, to live to take one more breath.

“’There is nothing that keeps wicked men at any one moment out of hell, but the mere pleasure of God.’ —By the mere pleasure of God, I mean his sovereign pleasure, his arbitrary will, restrained by no obligation, hindered by no manner of difficulty, any more than if nothing else but God’s mere will had in the least degree, or in any respect whatsoever, any hand in the preservation of wicked men one moment.”¹

The third type of grace, as I understand it, is that material blessing from God that He bestows upon people as He chooses. And more than that, He does so without regard as to whether the recipients love and cherish the Giver, or use the gift as a way to rebel against the Giver. So when God gives a reprobate or a believer health, a good job, a nice home, and other things, it is a display of God’s grace toward them. However, in the case of the reprobate, it is usually also a means of condemnation, because they end up loving the things and hating God more and more.

The final type of God’s grace is one that is virtually never seen as grace by reprobates, and Christians need to be reminded of the gracious nature of it as well at times. This is the grace of God in calamity or suffering. In these types of events, God’s grace is displayed in a number of ways. In calamity on a grand and global scale that doesn’t affect you personally (i.e. your home, livelihood, and family were not harmed), God’s grace is displayed in the most obvious way, both to the Christian and the reprobate, because this “didn’t happen to me,” but it could have. When tragedy strikes closer to home, whether that is in the death of a loved one or your own personal health crisis, this displays God’s grace in very different ways depending on that person’s standing before Christ.

If, as a born-again believer in Christ Jesus, I lose a child (as I have) or have a diagnosis come back from the doctor that is terminal, my final reaction should be one that longs to be free from sin and the agony of the repercussions of sin and desire to be with my Lord. This helps us to loosen our tentative hold on the things of the world and strive be faithful and steadfast in our running of the Christian race. These experiences are trying and painful, and I do not diminish that part, but the final cry of our hearts is that of Job when he cried out to God and said,

“Naked I came from my mother's womb, And naked I shall return there. The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away. Blessed be the name of the LORD.” (Job 1:21)

When the reprobate loses a child or a loved one, or when they receive a life altering diagnosis from their physician, God is actually being gracious to this person. He is not just being gracious because their life was spared, but in the case of the terminal disease or close call with death, but because their life was spared while giving them a definite reminder of their mortality. This begs the question in the lives of those who are lost, “What’s next?” God’s grace here is that he allows them both the time and the personal initiative to humble themselves before God and be responsive to the saving gospel.

It is a means of grace for anyone, especially the unbeliever, when they must face their own mortality. Because it is when someone experiences the beginning of another life, when someone experience the ending of another life, or when someone experience the hastening approach of the end of their own life, all of the worldly offerings seem to sour and the eternal things can come into sharper focus.

God is the one who draws the unbelieving sinner unto Himself. And if He does this, the unbeliever will be changed into a believer. But, even if God does not grant faith and repentance to the unbeliever, he is still condemned because of his own sin and hardening of his heart toward the kindness of God displayed to him in so many different forms of grace.

---

¹ Jonathon Edwards, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” Preached at Enfield, July 8th, 1741,

The Correlation Between Election, Grace, and Sin

Over the past few days, I have been listening to John Piper preach out of Romans 8, specifically referring to Romans 8:28 and the following verses, and he has dealt a lot with what it means to be “called”. It was really enjoyable for me to hear these messages where the issue of predestination, or election, was specifically dealt with. While I am sure that the thoughts that I am having are nothing new to the theology of election or the debate between Calvinists and Arminians, they did seem cause the issues of election and grace to come into sharper focus for me than they had previously been.

In an effort to continue on the same line of thinking as my previous article concerning what was recently said on the Bible Answer Man regarding the host’s characterization and rejection of the doctrine of election, which is historically held by Christians who emphasize a completely sovereign view of God in salvation (modernly known as Calvinists), the issue of man’s role in the salvation process, specifically regarding our depravity, has been embedded on my thoughts. I have been thinking a lot about this, not because I find it enjoyable in and of itself to examine just how rotten I am, but it is enjoyable because I want to understand myself and magnify God’s glory, power, and beauty in my salvation and my ongoing sanctification.

If, in an attempt to get a broad and biblical view of the ideas pertaining to election, grace, and salvation, we begin to think about the nature of sin and mankind’s state in sin, I think that we will naturally and logically come to the necessary conclusion that election, the predetermined and sovereign choosing of individuals to be saved by God, is a central and indispensable part of the gospel of salvation by grace that the Bible teaches.

The doctrine of sin, in a nutshell, says that the first and only sinless man who was created by God, freely chose to sin in rebellion against God’s revealed command and authority. This rebellion resulted in such a cataclysmic backlash from God, and neither Adam nor Eve, I think, had any way to comprehend this magnitude (if any at all) of God’s retribution prior to their sin, nor did they posses any lexicon that would enable them to express the reality which immediately followed their plunge into sin. And because it was such an egregious affront to God when mankind sinned, that is why we are all actually and literally dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1, 5).

The physical, mental, and emotional components of every natural man’s being were condemned to suffering, deterioration, disease, and death following Adam’s sin. This physical death occurs, either gradually or without warning, after a period of life, whether long or short in duration. However, contrasted to that, we see the initial and perpetual state of man’s spirit as being dead. The spirit does not experience life in any real sense before dying, for it is dead from the point of its very creation.

The bible does not show man as simply being wounded in a sinful condition and therefore able to move closer to God. No. The bible clearly says that no man seeks after God (Romans 3:12) and all men’s hearts are wicked (Jeremiah 17:9). This paints a bleak picture for man, not only is he dead, but he doesn’t want to seek after God. I don’t want to gloss over the fact that man’s state is ‘dead’ too quickly, because it seems to me that if we genuinely deal with what it means to be spiritually dead, it will clear up a whole lot of problems and objections before they can gain any traction.

The word translated into the English word “dead” is the Greek word the Greek word nekroV (nekros) which literally means “dead” or “inanimate” and is used to describe a dead body or a corpse. In fact, I did a quick survey of the use of this word in the New Testament, and out of the 131 times that it is used, only a small amount of that time (I believe around 10 times) is this word used figuratively. For instance, “the guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men” (Matthew 28:4) and, “for this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found” (Luke 15:32).

The vast and overwhelming majority of the time that this word is used, it is explicitly referring to exactly what we, in our modern context, would refer to by using the words “dead” or “corpse”. Furthermore, I am provoked to study the use of this word and the concepts surrounding it further because it seemed that virtually every time that someone was first described as dead and subsequently as alive, it was stated very clearly that it was God who resurrected them. This may seem (and it may well turn out) to be nothing of magnificent importance to the discussion over election, but I believe that if we are taught and come to understand that when God physically raises someone from the dead that he or she plays absolutely no part in it, why would there be any difference when it comes to God’s and life giving act and spiritual resurrection of people?

Even on the surface of God’s resurrecting and life giving work, there is no circumstance where a cooperative effort between the dead and the life giver is present. For example, Jesus commanded Lazarus to live by saying, "Lazarus, come forth." (John 11:43) Christ didn’t meet Lazarus half-way. He didn’t offer to resurrect Lazarus as well as other friends or relatives of His that may have died during His lifetime. Christ didn’t ask Lazarus if he wanted to be alive again. He chose to resurrect Lazarus and Lazarus was made alive. My whole point in belaboring this story and the fact that men are dead in sin is that if we are dead, then we are unable to do anything spiritually positive.

In other words, dead men can’t choose life…because they’re dead. Lazarus couldn’t and neither can anyone who is only spiritually dead. A person’s dead spirit does not have the ability nor the desire to make itself alive.

Now, moving on to grace! The concept of grace as it relates to salvation has been communicated in our contemporary society by using the letters as an acronym stating that grace means, “God’s Riches At Christ’s Expense.” This statement is true, but I do not believe that it is fully true. And the danger of having the contemporarily understood definition of grace embodied in a pop-Christian-culture acronym is that this says nothing about man’s involvement and contribution (or lack thereof) to grace. J.I. Packer articulated the danger of this type of an over-simplification or dumbing-down of a concept or truth, whether the chnage is intentional and devious in nature or if it is innocent and good hearted in nature, when he said,

“A half truth presented as a whole truth is complete untruth.” ¹

Again, it is absolutely true that the grace of God in our salvation is truly God’s (Christ’s) Riches applied to us At Christ’s Expense. However, this statement says nothing concerning how it is then applied to us. The response would be to say that we receive it by grace, and that is true, but again, grace has turned into such a misused word in Christendom that it, sadly, no longer has the specific power of the truth of the full meaning. For instance, Mormons, Catholics, Arminians, and Calvinists all would probably agree with the definition of grace and say that man is saved by grace. But the question that needs to be answered is this; what do they all mean when they say, “grace”? When pressed what they mean, a Mormon would quote 2 Nephi 25:23 in the Book of Mormon which says, “for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”

Roman Catholicism, in their New Advent Encyclopedia, breaks down the concept of grace into (at least) two categories: actual grace and sanctifying grace. For this article’s purpose, I’ll deal with actual grace which because they define this grace as a “transient help to act,”²
specifically in the act of believing. This source goes on to state that this grace “is granted by God for the performance of salutary acts”, but coupled with the prior articulation that it is a “help” in the action of faith implies, necessarily, that man, to a certain extent, wills on his own (i.e. not moved specifically by God) to believe.

Arminians would hold that man chooses to receive the forgiveness of his sins in his free will. The Holy Spirit, necessarily, does not push Joe Pagan harder or softer than Doug Christian in their spiritual journeys, but pleads with them equally and the both have an equal ability to respond in faith. If an Arminian would say, in any form, that someone who believes was given more grace or special grace that an unbeliever does not receive, that person would no longer be a true Arminian. John Piper summarized a problem with this type of view (actually, it could be applied to the Catholic and Mormon views too),

...it assumes that ultimately we, in our own will power, provide the decisive, ultimate cause of our faith. That’s the point of that interpretation. That God only foresees people, not resting in God to provide the ultimate, decisive, faith that they need to believe, but producing, on their own, the decisive ultimate ground and cause of their faith.³

Calvinists hold that grace means unmerited favor and that God favors a man (or woman) apart from any of his own works or merits. Man takes no initiating part in his own salvation in and of himself. The part that this man plays, repenting from sin and expressing faith in God, is done through a special working of the Holy Spirit in him that is not present in unbelievers. In other words, God saves a person by giving them the faith to believe as well as the desire and ability to do so.

“ ⁵ In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice. ⁶ But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” (Romans 11:5,6)

It seems to me that the force of the distinction between grace and works is contained in the rejection of the very idea that any works that would be done in concert with God’s saving “grace” betray and contradict grace itself. The Judaizers were notorious for requiring some “works of the law” to be done in concert with faith for the salvation of the sinner. The New Testament categorically rejects this false notion of co-operating with some human work in order to attain salvation. But, even further than that, the New Testament itself describes the faith for salvation as a being gift of God itself (see Jeremiah 32:40; Matthew 16:17; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 1:29; 2 Timothy 2:24-26), and so the faith that man expresses is not, by definition, something that he does apart from God because the faith comes from God.

It seems to me that the Calvinist understanding and exposition of scripture is the only one that consistently holds to the truest understanding of God’s complete and total sovereignty and grace in the salvation of men. Since the term grace has, unfortunately, lost some of its teeth and offense in our culture, I am seriously considering using other terms in conjunction with grace that have not been watered down in order to be crystal clear about the biblical understanding of grace.⁴ There were three words that I believe will, when used in combination with grace, clarify the meaning of grace and hopefully dispel any misinterpretations or misunderstandings of what is meant when I use the term grace. These three words are “apportion”, “impart”, and “lavish”.

Where as both “apportion” and “impart” refer to the bestowing of something one another person (“bestow” was another word in the running), “lavish” seemed to communicate the massive quantity or quality of the gift as well giving the mental picture of dumping the gift on the other person in an overwhelming fashion. Furthermore, if I were to use a word and meaning that is even more contemporary in our society, I would say that God unloads His grace on us. In this context, “unload” is used in the sense of firing a gun’s ammunition at a target or in the sense of someone dumping out of their thoughts and emotions onto a willing, or unwilling, listener. God’s grace is more accurate than a sniper’s bullet, and the sinner on the receiving end of His unloading of grace is less willing to choose grace on his or her own behalf than the target caught in a sniper’s crosshairs chooses to receive the deadly bullet.

Again you may be thinking, “What does this have to do with the doctrine of election?” Well, my goal up until this point has been to articulate two doctrinal stances that most Protestant and evangelical Christians would confess because they are so plainly laid out in the Scriptures. First, man is dead, not wounded and in need of a physician, in his sins. And second, salvation is by God’s lavishing of His grace upon us. I firmly believe that all of my protestant brethren would agree with these statements. The problem, and where the division and disagreement comes from, is that these same people do not maintain a sense of continuity between these confessions of faith and truth with how they relate to one another in salvation.

The Bible clearly and unabashedly uses the terms “predestine”, “foreknown”, “elect”, and “chosen” when referring to those who have been saved by Christ. If we hold to the two biblical principles that I have been laboring to articulate, then when it comes to defining and articulating what the doctrine of election is, what possible optional understandings do we have? If we are elected based upon our own free-will choice of God that is necessarily uninfluenced by God, we then turn the cross of Calvary into a bargaining table where if we bring our choice, then we’re saved. By doing this, we neither maintain the doctrine of man’s deadness in sin nor the complete grace of God in salvation.

For reasons that are eternally glorious to the Holy Trinity, and only the Trinity, God has chosen to lavish some men and women with a special elective love that is only bestowed upon some. None deserve this treatment by God, neither those who are elected nor those who are not elected. Could God have chosen to save all mankind and still have remained the same just and holy God that He is? I assume that He could have, but He didn’t. Could God have chosen to save no one and still have remained the same loving God that He is? I assume that He could have, but He didn’t.

It is not for me to validate God’s plan and method of saving the sinners that He has chosen to save, nor is it my task to come up with articulate ways of expressing the revealed plan of God in salvation so as to make it completely understandable and seen as infinitely benevolent and gracious to all men. That is for the Holy Spirit to do in the heart of the believer. My desire is to attempt, in my feeble way, to show what the Bible says and show that the conclusion of sovereign election in salvation is both biblical and logical. It is for me to read the Word of God, to say what it says, but it is not to make a doctrine more palatable to men by changing what words mean by means of clever speech or imposing debating techniques. The simple and plain articulation of God’s Word is sufficient to validate itself and persuade the heart and mind of one who truly desires to be conformed to the mind of Christ. This conformity is not an easy thing to achieve for anyone, even the elect, to do, and it is definitely not something that is easy to do consistently.

---

¹ Heard on the radio on 3/30/07 WOTMR

² http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06689x.htm

³ John Piper “Foreknown, Predestined, Conformed to Christ” preached on 8/4/02, radio broadcast 3/30/07. This quote came from transcribing the audio of this sermon.

⁴ The “teeth” and “offense” of the idea of grace is profound. It is offensive because man is naturally disposed (because of sin) to want to be master and in control. Grace takes it out of our control. It has teeth because it cuts any cords of man’s contribution, no matter how small or large we might see them, toward his own salvation.